Anytime a major platform — online or in the real world — makes a significant change, a certain percentage of users will complain. Some of them will complain loudly. And often.
That’s exactly what happened when Twitter removed @username mentions from the 140-character tweet-size limit.
https://twitter.com/Twitter/status/847479110616047616
Almost immediately, half the Twitterverse began using its newfound freedom to spam or troll the other half, which reacted predictably: some with confusion; many with downright outrage.
Maybe twitter thinks if no one can tell who's talking to who no one can get upset about being abused because WHO CAN TELL problem solved
— Hayley Campbell (@hayleycampbell) March 30, 2017
Twitter doubtless intended the change to be beneficial. After all, some @usernames take up one helluva lot of tweet real estate. By separating usernames from the actual content of tweets, Twitter reasoned, users could say more of what they want to say without resorting to “tweet storms,” or series of rapid-fire (or not-so-rapid-fire, depending upon thumb skillz) messages that often get lost in the maelstrom that is Twitter.
Twitter founder Jack Dorsey explained the change provides “a cleaner focus on the text of a conversation instead of addressing syntax.”
Rolling out today: use all 140 characters for replies, and a cleaner focus on the text of a conversation instead of addressing syntax https://t.co/qAHQy1UtWu
— jack (@jack) March 30, 2017
Although the plan sounds good, the move introduces enormous potential for abuse. Twitter opened the floodgates just a little too far when it capped the number of @username mention under the new system at 50.
The change is a spammer’s dream and troll heaven. By inserting the @usernames of tweeters whose followers number in the tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands, spammers can spread their marketing messages far and wide, cluttering up the tweet streams of innocent people. The tactic, used with limited effect before the change, is called a Twitter canoe, and most of the time it’s used to include several people in an active conversation … or it was until now. With 50 @usernames allowed, a canoe has become more like a flotilla, and it’s well-nigh impossible to figure out who’s in the conversation.
It’s also well-nigh impossible to find the @username of a troll in order to remove that person from the tweet stream in hopes of limiting its disruption.
The Twitterverse is not amused. Some took sarcasm to new heights:
https://twitter.com/ThBenkoe/status/847480439098851331
https://twitter.com/prehellenic/status/847512552997240832
Others chided Twitter about responding to users’ requests with a cure worse than the disease.
People: Let us tweet edit
People: Deactivate abusive accounts
People: More than 4 pics per tweets plsTwitter: Here. New reply interface!
— Faizal Hamssin (@faizalhamssin) March 30, 2017
https://twitter.com/edzitron/status/847523674383044608
https://twitter.com/tha_rami/status/847563881870479360
Still others blasted the new system for creating even more conversation confusion than existed before.
https://twitter.com/leyawn/status/847175227427749888
https://twitter.com/_Gneisha/status/847513735598022656
https://twitter.com/SirAceOfPlaces/status/847499483235573760
EVERYONE FOR MONTHS NOW: the non @ replies suck ass they're shit
TWITTER: oh yeah def hear you on that— rachel (@rachelmillman) March 30, 2017
Bear in mind: You can’t see all the people on the @reply list unless you “reply all.”
— Ted Han ★ 韓聖安 (@knowtheory) March 30, 2017
And, predictably, some folks are irked about receiving notification upon notification upon notification of replies to conversations from which they can’t seem to disengage. Each reply from one of the 50 people in the @reply list sets off a new thread, so even if a user can get himself or herself dropped from one, he or she remains in 49 others … which multiply as time goes on.
https://twitter.com/leyawn/status/847510689182875649
Thanks, Twitter. Nice to know you’re looking out for us.
